P B DESAI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioner seeks to impugned the order dated 9th August, 1995 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 23rd Court, Esplanade, Bombay, summoning him for an offence under Section 338 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.

(2.) WHEN Mr. P.R.Vakil rose to address the Court, Mr. R.F. Lambey, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent raised a preliminary objection namely that the impugned order is revisable and consequently this Petition is not maintainable Mr. Lambey vehemently contended that the Apex Court in the decision reported in A.I.R. 1978 S.C. page 47, Madhu Limaye, Appellant V. State of Maharashtra, Respondent, has in unequivocal terms stated in paragraph 8 that the inherent powers of the High Court should not be resorted to if there is an express provision in the code for the redress of the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(3.) IN the decision reported in A.I.R. 1978 S.C. page 47 (supra) the Apex Court approved the aforesaid view taken in Amar Nath's case (supra). IN paragraph 15 while dealing with Amarnath's case the Apex Court observed thus :- "..... Yet, for the reasons already alluded to, we feel no difficulty in coming to the conclusion, after due consideration, that an order rejecting the plea of the accused on a point which, when accepted, will conclude the particular proceeding, will surely be not an interlocutory order within the meaning of S.397(2)."